QTR-Quadtone RIP

Thank you Michael and Paul.
The light has come on - and that leads to a few more thoughts.

Since QTR's output is linearized, if I want my monitor to match the print I should be using a linearized gray space - Gray-Lab or GG22 with Paul's curve.  Brilliant! 

So if I use GG22, I would think I should apply the curve immediately on opening the file rather than just before printing as Paul suggests.  This way I'll have 'linear' vision during editing.  I think that would be ok as long as I'm in 16bit depth.  Brilliant still?

But if QTR ignores profiles as Michael says, now I have no clue why Roy would suggest "For Windows where it's necessary to save a tiff file, you should Convert to Profile using either Gray Matte Paper or Gray Photo Paper.  Then save the file for printing in QTRgui." I could see soft proofing, but why convert the profile?

Thanks so much.  The cloud is starting to lift.....

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> >... Roy Harrington is suggesting Gray-Lab for a workspace and 
> > Paul Roark is suggesting Gray Gamma 2.2.
> 
> My approach -- editing in Gray Gamma 2.2 -- does require that you place an
> adjustment curve on the file, perhaps via a layer, before printing with QTR.
> (You could, alternatively, convert the files working space.)  The curve I
> use is at http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/GG22-to-QTR.zip  With Roy's
> approach you don't need to do this step.  So, in that respect Roy's approach
> is more straight forward, at least if QTR printing is the predominate target
> of the file editing.
> 
> I like to stick with existing industry standards as much as possible.  Gray
> Gamma 2.2 (which I often abbreviate as "GG22") is, in effect, a subset of
> Adobe RGB, which is probably the most common working space.  I believe Adobe
> Elements uses GG22 if no other space is designated.  So, if a novice just
> converts a file to grayscale and prints it with the Epson driver, with no
> real knowledge of these issues, an inkset and printer setup that is close
> for GG22 will most likely give a reasonable match to the monitor.  I've
> found that many who simple purchase a system from MIS do just this.  So, if
> what I make is, in effect, rather "plug and play," the support costs are
> less, at least for systems that use the Epson driver, which is usually where
> I start.  The exception, of course, is the 3MK 1800 system that can't be
> handled by the Epson driver.
> 
> GG22 files also display appropriately on the internet.  
> 
> > I don't want to have to guess at my shadows in Photoshop. 
> > So I really want to start out on the right foot.....
> 
> Either approach, if used correctly, should give a good match between the
> monitor and print.
> 
> I started with systems that used a straight line space like QTR and resisted
> changing to GG22 for a while because I thought the compressed shadows wasted
> too much of our limited 8 bit file depth.  However, with 16 bit now the
> standard, the "inefficiency" that bothered me at first turns out to be an
> advantage.  Not only do I have a reserve of shadow information in that
> compressed GG22 toe, but with glossy printing and its huge dmax, the
> compressed shadows give an interesting effect of being able to see further
> into them as the light level increases.  You, in effect, don't run out of
> shadow detail and have them just go gray.
> 
> > Since I'll be using UT14 I'm thinking I'd be wiser to stay with
> > Roark's GG2.2.
> 
> UT14 is one of the inksets that is fairly plug and play.  I've made ICCs
> with QTR's Create ICC-RGB program that are also available for the Epson
> driver.  These ICCs should "see" whatever profile is attached to the file
> and print appropriately. 
> 
> > But I also have PrintFix Pro and will be developing my own profiles 
> > and curves.
> 
> I use QTR regularly with the curve adjustment approach.  If it's on a layer,
> I just edit in GG22 with the layer inactive and check the layer box when
> printing with QTR.  It's easy to convert back and forth.  
> 
> I like to avoid any more conversions than necessary.  While most of us on
> these lists now start with high bit depth files, there are lots of people
> who simply convert their digital Jpegs to grayscale and print.  So, I've
> geared much of what I do to making the systems default to something that'll
> work OK for these people.
> 
> > as a Vista user should I be saving my TIF in a different workspace 
> > to bring it into QTR?
> 
> I don't use Vista that much, but I don't think there is any difference in
> this respect.
> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>